Balancing?

[kremator 1064]

DayZ != Arma3

[gossamersolid 155]

DayZ != Arma3

He's not saying DayZ is ArmA 3. He's saying why is it that DayZ is getting so much focus and improvments and A3 isn't?

The answer is simple: Money.

DayZ brought in a lot of money and it'll be bringing in even more soon. It's also very very popular, so a lot of development focus is going towards DayZ.

If you look at the changelogs for the ArmA 3 alpha, a majority of the changes aren't actual code changes to the engine. They are almost all scripting or config related. This makes me believe that there aren't many programmers actually working on A3. Makes sense why the new features we are looking for are getting scrapped or not implemented.

[TSAndrey 1]

He's not saying DayZ is ArmA 3. He's saying why is it that DayZ is getting so much focus and improvments and A3 isn't?

The answer is simple: Money.

DayZ brought in a lot of money and it'll be bringing in even more soon. It's also very very popular, so a lot of development focus is going towards DayZ.

If you look at the changelogs for the ArmA 3 alpha, a majority of the changes aren't actual code changes to the engine. They are almost all scripting or config related. This makes me believe that there aren't many programmers actually working on A3. Makes sense why the new features we are looking for are getting scrapped or not implemented.

Is that why A3 has a new engine, 2 new maps, new vehicles/weapons, armies, a campaign, COOP and tons of new features?

[gossamersolid 155]

Is that why A3 has a new engine, 2 new maps, new vehicles/weapons, armies, a campaign, COOP and tons of new features?

The "new" engine, or iteration has been in development for at least 3 years and doesn't really have that many engine side changes that are noticeable. There's PhysX implemented, but does it really live up to what we were expecting? I guess it's hard to judge as we're just about to enter beta. I'll come back to that topic at release to be fair. The new animations are nice, but that has more to do with the animation designers than the programming behind it.

2 new maps -> Content designers

vehicles/weapons -> Content designers

missions -> Content designers

None of those three things are done by programmers.

[metalcraze 290]

GM6 Lynx is still not fixed btw. Neither are MX / MXSW rifles. What's the excuse now?

LOS mod from TPWCAS does a pretty decent job with this.

Actually it doesn't. AI just becomes aware of targets within 20-50m but other than that is still completely incapable of reacting to them in any reasonable way. It's hardcoded into the engine.

Is that why A3 has a new engine, 2 new maps, new vehicles/weapons, armies, a campaign, COOP and tons of new features?

Oh yes it's pretty unique and rarely seen that a new game doesn't use exactly the same assets from 4 years ago.

But tons of new features? Like?

Edited June 21, 2013 by metalcraze

[Anachoretes 10]

He's saying why is it that DayZ is getting so much focus and improvments and A3 isn't?

Oh, really? Thats why DayZ not using RV4 with better rendering? Comparing the small mod about nothing and platfom - it is too much.

[Maio 293]

Hello boys and hopefully girls(send me pics)

I would like to ask you to return to topic at hand, which is balancing.

No more DayZ talk or any sorts of subtle flamebating.

Thank you :)

[samatra 85]

Some complains about balance. There is a huge gap between small arms and vehicles in A3, if you are infantryman without rocket launcher you can't do anything against even simplest vehicles in A3 (Ifrit\Hunter\Strider). In A2 this gap was filled by low-tier AT launchers (AT4\RPG18) and armed UAZs\HMMWV\Offroads that were quite powerful and dangerous to heavier vehicles but still vulnerable to small arms which required smart and careful use of these vehicles. In A3 on the other hand as soon as you get into Ifrit or Hunter you are invincible unless enemy has AT launcher which is just point, click and kill weapon. I believe that A3 needs these low-tier one-time use AT launchers back so each second soldier can be supplied with one and could engage smaller vehicles in short distance (make these launchers behave as they do in ACE2 so it would be very hard to hit targets at the distance, but you could do some damage up close or to stationary targets)

[TSAndrey 1]

The "new" engine, or iteration has been in development for at least 3 years and doesn't really have that many engine side changes that are noticeable. There's PhysX implemented, but does it really live up to what we were expecting? I guess it's hard to judge as we're just about to enter beta. I'll come back to that topic at release to be fair. The new animations are nice, but that has more to do with the animation designers than the programming behind it.

2 new maps -> Content designers

vehicles/weapons -> Content designers

missions -> Content designers

None of those three things are done by programmers.

Dynamic lighting, new audio system, new shadow system, new water effects, new weather effects...

[blu3sman 11]

..tons of new features

Dynamic lighting, new audio system, new shadow system, new water effects, new weather effects...

How much of those many features actually benefit gameplay mechanics? (I assume the core aspect of Arma is not eye candy)

Dynamic lighting is technically same as OA, but with more lightsources. Zero difference for gameplay.

What new shadow "system"?

Fog is nice, no doubt. What other new weather effects?.. Like wind affecting projectiles, rain changing vehicle traction on different surfaces?

But I can list a few new features that matter to gameplay.

New animations with no inertia. Change sprint direction in the blink of an eye, dodging bullets is no big deal. Run uphill faster than on level surface.

Add to this new advertised encumberance system, which lets you perform abovementioned stunts fully loaded, carrying AT, .50 cal rifle, lots of explosives and FAKs*.

New accessible weapon handling, dumps collisions, so you won't cry how you're pwned in cqb with your favorite sniper rifle.

New lighting features improved sun glare, lowered to 17.2% from Arma 2, for proper balancing during morning fights. We promote fair combat!

New PhysX enabled vehicles feature Magic-hand-that-puts-you-back-on-wheels^TM if you've not been careful enough with driving.

*Oh yes, new medical system! Press X to refill your hitpoint bar, nuff said.

Not to sound too harsh, but seriously, only improvements that I can mention after 3 years of development:

Adjusting stances, inventory system, copiloting in helis, wip soundengine, mod unfriendly attachments system, raw implementation of physx

Edited June 22, 2013 by Blu3sman

[metalcraze 290]

^exactly

Also new shadow system? But I'm pretty sure we had stencil shadows since forever.

BTW surprisingly OPFOR machinegun has semi-auto fire mode (not sure if it makes sense on an actual MG). Hope MXSW gets it too since it's the weapon that actually has to have it.

Edited June 22, 2013 by metalcraze

[byku 13]

Sounds harsh, but have to agree. We didn't see much that truly affects more realistic gameplay. I really hope that they have a lot of new technical stuff hidden somewhere to show us before the final.

Edited June 22, 2013 by Byku

[bad benson 1733]

only improvements that I can mention after 3 years of development:

Adjusting stances, inventory system, copiloting in helis, wip soundengine, mod unfriendly attachments system, raw implementation of physx

not harsh at all. that is a great summary. i thought these things would be just the start but it seems more and more like this is it.

[Variable 322]

not harsh at all. that is a great summary. i thought these things would be just the start but it seems more and more like this is it.

Yep, and on top of that, features that we have on Arma 2 are dumbed down or removed. This is very disappointing...

[ric 1]

Yep, and on top of that, features that we have on Arma 2 are dumbed down or removed. This is very disappointing...

BF3 made over 600 million I believe.... this sadly is the trend in FPS theses days :( Statserbating,score whoring and vacuous play :(

[Wolfstriked 11]

Some complains about balance. There is a huge gap between small arms and vehicles in A3, if you are infantryman without rocket launcher you can't do anything against even simplest vehicles in A3 (Ifrit\Hunter\Strider). In A2 this gap was filled by low-tier AT launchers (AT4\RPG18) and armed UAZs\HMMWV\Offroads that were quite powerful and dangerous to heavier vehicles but still vulnerable to small arms which required smart and careful use of these vehicles. In A3 on the other hand as soon as you get into Ifrit or Hunter you are invincible unless enemy has AT launcher which is just point, click and kill weapon. I believe that A3 needs these low-tier one-time use AT launchers back so each second soldier can be supplied with one and could engage smaller vehicles in short distance (make these launchers behave as they do in ACE2 so it would be very hard to hit targets at the distance, but you could do some damage up close or to stationary targets)

Not true as I have destroyed many of those vehicles with grenades and then finished with bullets.

[chortles 263]

Which grenades and rounds would those be? That does matter in addressing SaMatra's remark about lack of "even lighter" vehicles and/or "low tier" AT...

By the way, is anyone noticing handling characteristics differences in the Mi-48 Kajman from the AH-99 Blackfoot? I mean, the latter should "for realism"/"for authenticity" be compared against the purported stats of the RAH-66, but so far the main differences between the beta attack helos seems to mainly be in the armaments, the AH-99 being able to "take controls" and "release controls", the Mi-48 having eight passenger seats with helicopter inventory (cargo) access* and maybe some aspects of the cockpit views? Definitely not mirror images so there is some asymmetry, but the only thing I've heard about piloting differences was a player anecdote that he managed to keep a Mi-48 airborne despite all systems red and fly "controllably (probably thanks to the lack of tail rotor)", though he attributed this to the Mi-48's sheer durability.

EDIT: I just found an anecdote about how AH-99 flares could be defeated by OPFOR MANPADS -- "within 1km and fired perpendicular to the direction of travel" -- but I haven't found any such testing of Mi-48 flares against BLUFOR MANPADS, although the AH-99 has the flares advantage at five full sixty-flare bursts compared to the Mi-48's three full sixty-flare bursts and one twelve-flare "mini-burst".

* Admittedly I find it redundant to have operating passenger doors when one can get in and out even when they're closed.

Edited June 22, 2013 by Chortles

[ric 1]

Which grenades and rounds would those be? That does matter in addressing SaMatra's remark about lack of "even lighter" vehicles and/or "low tier" AT...

By the way, is anyone noticing handling characteristics differences in the Mi-48 Kajman from the AH-99 Blackfoot? I mean, the latter should "for realism"/"for authenticity" be compared against the purported stats of the RAH-66, but so far the main differences between the beta attack helos seems to mainly be in the armaments, the AH-99 being able to "take controls" and "release controls", the Mi-48 having eight passenger seats with helicopter inventory (cargo) access* and maybe some aspects of the cockpit views? Definitely not mirror images so there is some asymmetry, but the only thing I've heard about piloting differences was a player anecdote that he managed to keep a Mi-48 airborne despite all systems red and fly "controllably (probably thanks to the lack of tail rotor)", though he attributed this to the Mi-48's sheer durability.

EDIT: I just found an anecdote about how AH-99 flares could be defeated by OPFOR MANPADS -- "within 1km and fired perpendicular to the direction of travel" -- but I haven't found any such testing of Mi-48 flares against BLUFOR MANPADS, although the AH-99 has the flares advantage at five full sixty-flare bursts compared to the Mi-48's three full sixty-flare bursts and one twelve-flare "mini-burst".

* Admittedly I find it redundant to have operating passenger doors when one can get in and out even when they're closed.

you didnt happen to see anyone repairing the helocopters in flight with a propane torch did you? ;)

[Sniperwolf572 758]

Not to sound too harsh, but seriously, only improvements that I can mention after 3 years of development:

Adjusting stances, inventory system, copiloting in helis, wip soundengine, mod unfriendly attachments system, raw implementation of physx

Yeah, and also only:

Diving, submarines, additional movement speed, useable handguns, vehicle handling (which you toss out all the great features out the airlock due to the minor thing like the autocorrect thing that could and should be removed), ragdoll (important for gameplay due to uninterruptible animations where you spent rounds to make sure the guy is down), improved clouds (interesting dogfights when we have planes), insanely improved fog, proper collimators, proper GL zeroing, WIP changes to rain (assuming you won't be able to ignore it this time), default implementation of freefall, item bound parachutes that open on-demand, improvements to the grenade system (which is a bit raw and naive now I believe), working mirrors (and other PiP stuff).

And that's only gameplay affecting things. Get a grip.

Edited June 22, 2013 by Sniperwolf572

[chrisb 196]

I really love this series, been the best thing ever on pc, I hope its a great success for them, they deserve it.

But it’s a turning point, for the players not BIS, they have to do what they feel best for their business. The players are the ones that need to decide where they stand with the new addition to the series.

For now I will keep playing A2, its more realistic, doesn't look as good granted, but its the type of game I want to play. That may change over time with mod/addons or DLC's etc, but for now A3 is for a nice look around, drive/fly etc, whereas A2 is for realistic warfare game-play at its best, for me anyway..

[byku 13]

...

Yes... but it doesn't make Arma a lot more realistic game. Core and important functions are still not present(better armor simulation, better missile tracking systems simulation, wind affecting bullets, weapon resting etc.), the mechanics in core are the same. They've even made a step back, now the pilot can't control unguided rockets... but they've still got 0.29 of the game to go :P. They've made some interesting changes, and it seems that they are listening to the community, so i have hope that it will only get better. If not... then bloody hell i will be disappointed.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Which grenades and rounds would those be? That does matter in addressing SaMatra's remark about lack of "even lighter" vehicles and/or "low tier" AT...

By the way, is anyone noticing handling characteristics differences in the Mi-48 Kajman from the AH-99 Blackfoot? I mean, the latter should "for realism"/"for authenticity" be compared against the purported stats of the RAH-66, but so far the main differences between the beta attack helos seems to mainly be in the armaments, the AH-99 being able to "take controls" and "release controls", the Mi-48 having eight passenger seats with helicopter inventory (cargo) access* and maybe some aspects of the cockpit views? Definitely not mirror images so there is some asymmetry, but the only thing I've heard about piloting differences was a player anecdote that he managed to keep a Mi-48 airborne despite all systems red and fly "controllably (probably thanks to the lack of tail rotor)", though he attributed this to the Mi-48's sheer durability.

EDIT: I just found an anecdote about how AH-99 flares could be defeated by OPFOR MANPADS -- "within 1km and fired perpendicular to the direction of travel" -- but I haven't found any such testing of Mi-48 flares against BLUFOR MANPADS, although the AH-99 has the flares advantage at five full sixty-flare bursts compared to the Mi-48's three full sixty-flare bursts and one twelve-flare "mini-burst".

* Admittedly I find it redundant to have operating passenger doors when one can get in and out even when they're closed.

I have destroyed Iffrits by throwing a few grenades under it and then a good amount of 5.56 with the MXSW in past and on MP.Cant do it right now for some reason.I did destroy it with 16 grenades just now though if that matters.

I do think that 5.56 and 6.5 should not destroy Iffrit's bullet proof glass..............

[chortles 263]

Byku, the pilot can control the weapons by manual fire, though of course the preferable option would simply be to leave the unguided rockets to the pilot by default in the first place while the gunner gets the gun (of course)... I'm not so sure re: ATGMs/AAMs.

Wolfstriked, I asked what sort of grenades... are you talking about hand grenades, for example, or 40 mm grenades...

[Wolfstriked 11]

Byku, the pilot can control the weapons by manual fire, though of course the preferable option would simply be to leave the unguided rockets to the pilot by default in the first place while the gunner gets the gun (of course)... I'm not so sure re: ATGMs/AAMs.

Wolfstriked, I asked what sort of grenades... are you talking about hand grenades, for example, or 40 mm grenades...

Hand grenades.

[blu3sman 11]

Diving, submarines

I'd happily trade it for TOH FM

additional movement speed

Tactical pace? Yes, nice addition along with prone sprint. But I find that I use it rather rarely.

useable handguns

??

vehicle handling,ragdoll

Sure. Thanks, nvidia. But what benefit if different surface types are not simulated for vehicles (everything behaves like concrete, roads have 0 strategic importance as well as tracked vehicles).

improved clouds, insanely improved fog

Clouds were implemented in RV before A3, ctrl-c ctrl-v.Agree with proper fog, good feature, i mentioned it.

proper collimators, proper GL zeroing

little details but +

WIP changes to rain, improvements to the grenade system

I know a lot of promised improvements too. Have to see it to know whether it is one.

default implementation of freefall, item bound parachutes that open on-demand

don't stretch it that far, it's like 1 man-hour scripting job.

working mirrors (and other PiP stuff)

Other pip stuff like proper MFDs, scopes, periscopes in armor? Oh wait, it's so low quality and inefficient, that no one uses it.Anyway, thats just like, my opinion.